Sharon Weinberger at Wired takes the US government to task over news of a no-bid contract. The question is how ARINC, a Maryland subsidiary of the Carlyle Group, was awarded $500 million as the sole broker Russian Mi-17 military aircraft for Iraq and Afghanistan. The details are interesting, and perhaps a scandalous investigation will ensue, but I especially appreciated reading the conclusions on culture and fraud:
In the meantime, here’s a bit of free advice for the Pentagon about buying Russian weapons: The first guy that shows up at your door waiving an exclusive agreement is also the first guy you should boot out of your office. The Russians don’t really give exclusive agreements to American companies, they sell helicopters. Sorry, you’ve been had, not just by the Russians, but by the Americans, too.
And here’s a tip for ARINC on Russian business culture: The same guys who gave you that nifty piece of paper claiming you were the one and only company authorized to buy the helicopters are the same guys that you have to trust to actually deliver the helicopters after you’ve paid for them. And no, drinking shots of Stoli with the Russians after you sign the paperwork doesn’t really make you lifelong brothers. Next time pay on delivery.
And hey, if they don’t think that’s funny, trust me, the Russians do.
The US government is buying Russian helicopters made in Ulan Ude instead of American aircraft? The Russians must find that funny too.
The dog was believed to have drowned and Griffith said the family was devastated. But out of sight of the family, Sophie Tucker was swimming doggedly and finally made it to St. Bees Island, five nautical miles away, and began the sort of life popularized by the TV reality show “Survivor”.
She voted other dogs off the island? Ran around in a bikini and considered magazine cover offers? Ok, I confess I never watched the show so the reference is lost on me. Get it? Lost. Haha.
Griffith said that when the dog was first spotted on the island she had been in poor condition.
“And then all of a sudden she started to look good and it was when the rangers had found baby goat carcasses so she’d started eating baby goats,” she said.
Amazing story of survival with a happy ending. I wonder if Tom Hanks will star in the movie version.
The latest skeptic is Thomas Weber, Mercedes chief of research and development. In today’s Ha Aretz, an Israeli newspaper, Weber said that battery-swapping stations for electric cars may, in fact, be dangerous. The Mercedes executive said his company explored a similar plan in the 1970s, and discovered that changing a battery on the road could cause electrocution or fire.
In 1972, Mercedes built an electric bus called the LE 306. The vehicle was limited to 40 miles of range but, according to a company press release, the battery could be replaced using a “push-through horizontal-exchange technology.” The release promised that the process, mostly manual, would take the same time as a fill-up at a gas station. Eighty-nine prototype vehicles were built and the battery swapping system was “extensively tested,” according to the company.
The basis of the critique from Mercedes is very different from others. Most notably, Mercedes is saying that even with a proprietary and closed system they found it not feasible with 1970s technology. Apparently even modern technology would be insufficient. The idea that it could cause a fire is neither here nor there since gasoline stations can and do cause much more dangerous fires. Others point out that the lack of standards between car makers would make swaps impractical. Imagine if every car required a different fuel pump. That seems like a more significant obstacle.
